AIBU to be annoyed by the term “virtue signaling“?

[Flyingfish2019]

Whenever people online or in IRL discuss how to reduce their ecological footprint other turn up and tell them that they are “virtue signaling“. I do not get this.

It becomes clearer and clearer that there is a big problem with climate change. If mankind continues to go on like we did in the past we will reach irreversible tipping points. Irreversible.

I think mankind needs to work together. We need to ensure the future of our children. I am s proud of people who are already doing their bit and even prouder of people who make big sacrifices for the cause... like a friend of mine who gave up his car. I couldn’t do this and it leaves me humbled.

I am no way perfect. My ecological footprint is far to big. So I am not in a position to judge anybody.

However I do not get why people who are trying to make a difference are blamed if virtue signaling... whatever that might be...

Is this about the phrase or about the environment? The phrase is used in ALL sorts of situations and sometimes it's very useful. So YABU.

That’s not virtue signalling though is it.

Virtue signalling is e.g. turning up to a climate change conference or rally via a jet airliner. It’s lecturing others whilst not following the advice yourself. It’s going along with sound ideas but behaving differently.

@BillHardersNewWife
Yes. Sometimes the phrase can be useful. If somebody has the habit of flying to the Carribean five times a year but boast about avoiding plastic straws he is probably virtue signaling... but I do think that most times when the word is Usedom is just to put a person down.

It's just another way of attempting to censor someone else's point of view. They are attempting to diminish the validity of someone else's point of view. It is like sneering at those who donate to charity as "do gooders". The person making the remark perhaps is unsettled or feels judged or called out in some way.

People are particularly sneer about attempts to improve an ecological footprint. Perhaps that hits people's guilt more? Or perhaps they genuinely think it's a conspiracy or lie of some sort. Though it confuses me when they do. As encouraging people to consume less doesn't have an obvious selling point. Most of the conspiracies "out there" seem based in the idea of somebody profiting out of it.

*is used

YANBU, I've seen it used on threads were family members, back in September, wanted to cut back on Christmas presents and cards.

There have been negative comments towards those that want to use recyclable wrapping pater etc.

If you post about wanting to eliminate food, especially meat waste, your called miserable.

But we all should be thinking about what lifestyle changes we can make.

@FreedomfromPE Who would benefit from people using less Ressource instead of more resources? Obviously not Exxon.
Who would benefit from that and have the means to bribe countless scientist? I do not get this when people say this.

I actually think it's a useful expression.

Caring about, speaking about and raising awareness of a cause isn't necessarily 'virtue signalling'.

Virtue signalling is about presenting an opinion that you believe will show you in the best 'moral' light (typically on social media) despite:

(a) It not being a true representation of how you ACTUALLY feel about the issue being discussed

or

(b) You make no personal efforts/sacrifices to address the issue you purport to care so deeply about.

Facebook is the worst for this.

I do think virtue signalling is a big problem and has a lot to answer for. It's better to quietly get on with doing good deeds, reducing your plastic usage and so on, without flagging it up and turning it into a 'big thing'.

It should be normal to do your best, be as kind as you can, think of others etc. It shouldn't be something you do purely so that you can publically give yourself a clap on the back.

It’s an annoying phrase no doubt I’ve only seen it on here

virtue signalling simply means giving the appearance of or talking about being virtuous while in actual fact doing the opposite ie being hypocritical
so people flying to climate change conferences (when their presence isn't strictly necessary) or protests is a good example of virtue signalling see Emma Thompson flying into Extinction rebellion protest
it is not the same as a few journalists or scientists flying to an affected area to film and show the damage climate change is doing to share with lots of others in my mind David Attenborough is not virtue signalling Emma Thompson and many other celebrities are

YANBU. I see it used inappropriately on threads on here all the time and it's really annoying. Some people just latch onto certain expressions and trot them out anytime they want to put someone down.

It's posting a picture of your food on Rate My Plate and making sure you mention it's vegan.

That's not what I understand by virtue signalling.

I thought it was a kind of boasting - doing something good but making sure everyone knows about it.

Eg -
'Was I Being Unreasonable to stop and offer this distressed mum some tissues and buy her a coffee.'
'Am I Being Unreasonable to tell you that I am wrapping my presents in brown paper this year?'
'Am I Being Unreasonable to donate £100 to a homeless charity instead of buying my extended family plastic tat?'
'AIBU to make sure my little one is in bed at 7.30 without any devices when all his friends are up till 10 playing online games with each other?'

That kind of thing?

If so, YABU. It's SO annoying.

If it's more like what's being discussed upthread. YANBU

I listened to a podcast recently who talked about this and his view was virtue signalling is not necessarily a negative and went on to say the slavery abolitionists were virtue signalling but it was a good thing. Made me ponder. I think perhaps we need a different descriptor for those that fly loads but are vegan and seem to want to make others guilty for not being vegan.

YANBU, just like 'champagne socialist' it's used to try and deflect or ignore arguments based on empathy.

With regards to climate change, the only actions that will save humanity are those taken internationally, by countries and multi-national corporations. Individuals can do absolutely nothing, alas, so I can see where the 'virtue signalling' accusations come from.

@CherryPlum I disagree. I do not think we should be quiet about our“god deeds“. I think we should talk to other so that we can learn from what they are doing.

@GoodjobSteve What do you mean by “individuals can do nothing“. Of course individuals can do their bit... by consuming less meat, flying less, using their cars less often and so on... it makes a small difference but it does make a difference.

I do understand what you mean, it can definitely be used as a dismissive shut down of debate. However, it's a tricky one as talking about actions (climate as in your post for example), can come across as smug and that never brings out the best in people. I really think talking about action without bringing yourself into it works best. Talking about what you do can always cross the line into shaming those that don't (even if that isn't the intent, it's that personal guilt coming into play), plus I've seen some people talking about things who are blatantly wanting a pat on the back because they're so much better as a person.
So, not unreasonable exactly but it's a necessary phrase at times. As well as an insult at others

I actually think it's a useful expression.
Caring about, speaking about and raising awareness of a cause isn't necessarily 'virtue signalling'.

Virtue signalling is about presenting an opinion that you believe will show you in the best 'moral' light (typically on social media) despite:

(a) It not being a true representation of how you ACTUALLY feel about the issue being discussed
or
(b) You make no personal efforts/sacrifices to address the issue you purport to care so deeply about

This ^^

Caring about a cause isn't virtue signalling.

I often think a good example of some of the virtue signalling on here are things like:
"I can't believe how judgemental you all are. Maybe the parent can't help their children running wild in the cafe. Maybe they had a tough day and needed a break. Maybe they had mental health issues and couldn't face calming their children down. How about you stop being so perfect for a minute. I'd rather have a happy lively child than sit with a judgey cats bum face like some of you."
In reality most people would be annoyed or irritated if they were subjected to loud screaming and running around.

Online virtue signalling is funny because people will frantically fall over themselves to wag their finger at people (and prove how open minded, liberal, totally and utterly enlightened they are on any topic from wrapping paper to mental health).

Flyingfish2019 The small difference it makes is not enough. Even when added together over millions of people. Bit depressing, I know!

Surely flying to a Climate change conference and lecturing "the lesser people" on how we must all "do our bit" is hypritical, not virtue signalling. I would say virtue signalling is smugly saying look at me I'm saving the planet by gioving up such a lot/ youre not- and being tedious about it.

Equally climate change is a thing. Is it man-made? Can we change it? Why do teh dates start at 1850 and not before?

Individuals doing something won’t be enough but still better than nothing.

@GoodJobSteve
Unfortunately I have things to do and cannot stay for longer but please google climate crisis and tipping points. This really is about the future of our children. So we must think about what small lifestyle changes we can make. It is only small things a individual can do to help but this is so important that I feel I must try to make a little difference however small. The small difference many people make might just be the small difference in temperature that keep the permafrost from thawing and might result in big differences.

I‘ll be back later and we talk about this if you want to.